RobustFeedback

[RobustFeedback @FeedbackRobust]

@rscottri @brklynmind @mattyglesias Don't care about morale. Care about the probability of timely rent, and how that probability affects landlord&builder behavior. You seem to be of the opinion that regulations preventing eviction due to nonpayment have trivial effect on such probability. That's really ignorant.

[RobustFeedback @FeedbackRobust]

@rscottri @brklynmind @mattyglesias I do. People, whether they be tenants, landlords, or property developers, do respond to incentives.

[RobustFeedback @FeedbackRobust]

@mattyglesias "Relax mortgage rules" is a euphemism for subsidizing credit. Subsidizing credit nearly certainly inflates prices, which in turn increases leverage via relaxed mortgage rules. Eventually we're back to 2008. It'll probably eventually happen. Voters prefer sweet little lies.

[RobustFeedback @FeedbackRobust]

@JettSett38 ...the system is designed to prevent fraud. A system designed to prevent fraud would significantly promote same day, in person, voting, with results tabulated very quickly. Dolts like you provide fuel to dolts like Trump.

[RobustFeedback @FeedbackRobust]

@kbo_coyote @JettSett38 Hey, stupid? I posited no conspiracies. I don't even particularly care who wins elections. I only accurately noted that when a "mark" can have equal validation effect as a "signature", since the witness signature isn't automatically subject to verification, it's not true that...

[RobustFeedback @FeedbackRobust]

@kbo_coyote @JettSett38 Don't know. Do know that when any "x" or '"-" is called a "signature", and the needed witness signature is not subject to examination, the system is undeniably designed to promote fraud, not prevent it. Stop. Being. Stupid.

[RobustFeedback @FeedbackRobust]

@kbo_coyote @JettSett38 A system where an actual signature of the voter is not required (any mark will suffice) and witness signatures are not examined for authenticity, is a system designed to promote fraud, not limit it. Stop. Being. Stupid.

[Phil Magness @PhilWMagness]

When Gabriel Zucman manipulated tax rate stats to show the wealthy paying less than the poor and tried to memory hole his own previously published numbers that undermined this claim, academia cheered him on because they liked his political narrative and gave him the Clark Medal.

When Kevin Kruse plagiarized multiple passages in his published works over the past two decades, academia circled the wagons around him, attacked the person who discovered it (i.e. me) as "politically motivated," and dismissed overwhelming evidence as "accidental copying and pasting."

When Quinn Slobodian got caught altering the text of Mises quotations to make them sound racist, academia made him co-editor of the journal where he did it and showered him with prizes.

When Nancy MacLean got caught engaging in wholesale fabrications of evidence (as well as egregious incompetence) in her book about James M. Buchanan, academia made her a finalist for the National Book Award.

When Nikole Hannah-Jones got caught denying and ghost-editing one of her most controversial claims out of the 1619 Project, academia handed her a cushy endowed professorship with full tenure despite her having nonexistent scholarly research outputs and zero teaching experience.

When Michael Bellesiles falsified historical documents to make an anti-second amendment argument as part of his history of gun ownership in America, academia gave him the Bancroft Prize and only rescinded it after the evidence became so overwhelming that they could not deny it anymore.

When Claudine Gay plagiarized multiple scholarly works over her career, academia made her president of Harvard and also tried to circle the wagons until the evidence became so overwhelming that they could not deny it anymore.

Yes, higher ed has a politicization problem and it often shows through in the exceedingly low standards of rigor in many of these fields. But it also manifests in other ways that are much more serious than a simple lack of rigor.

[RobustFeedback @FeedbackRobust]

@There1Big @mattyglesias Oh, and I have discussions where I don'r use demeaning terms frequently, since the topics I discuss aren't comsistenly pompous gasbags, or other matters where a demeaning term is needed to obtain an accurate portrayal.

[RobustFeedback @FeedbackRobust]

@There1Big @mattyglesias The point us to describe the world as it is, instead of pretending, in a child-like fashion, that it is something it is not.

[RobustFeedback @FeedbackRobust]

@Pookiesmyth @RameshPonnuru Oh, shut up, you dimwitted yapper. There's been no change. 57 yrs ago, Ted Kennedy criminally killed a woman on his staff, and was rewarded with 40 more years in the Senate, and the Senate Judiciary Committee Chair. Things are the same as they ever were.

[RobustFeedback @FeedbackRobust]

@bendreyfuss I usually root for the outcome that will result in the greatest number of devastated fans, so even if the Knicks win tonight, I can still hang on to the very slim chance that they'll blow a 2-0 lead that will result in gnashing of teeth, and rending of gaments.

[RobustFeedback @FeedbackRobust]

@Crypto_Palace28 @bendreyfuss @YanniHalk Idiocy is extremely common, after all.

[RobustFeedback @FeedbackRobust]

@JulianS85954219 @mattyglesias Never claimed otherwise. However, liars aren't off the hook, ethically, even if the listener wants to be lied to.

[RobustFeedback @FeedbackRobust]

@mattyglesias Is not purposely depicting reality in a disingenuous fashion in and of itself harmful? Does, "I want to win", render any effort to deceive the electorate tolerable?

[RobustFeedback @FeedbackRobust]

@jessesingal Very, very, overrated, and somewhat tedious movie. Saw it in IMAX, and didn't even think it was visually interesting.

[RobustFeedback @FeedbackRobust]

@bomani_jones In the shadow of Kareem, but a great, great, player.

[RobustFeedback @FeedbackRobust]

@iamjimmyo @bendreyfuss Opponents would drop a guard down to try to strip the ball before he began the shot, but it was much easier said than done, and he was excellent at passing to the open shooter or slasher.

[RobustFeedback @FeedbackRobust]

@TheHistoryOfTh2 I'd put the odds that he was sober, when the car went off the bridge, at about 1000-1, and then he took every step possible, including ensuring that his victim would die, to prevent his sobriety from being examined.